Just watched an interview with emma stone for the new spiderman movie coming out. She wouldn't say if her character will die, I have a feeling this reeks of a dark knight-esk sequel where the love interest of the super hero dies. She dies in the comics, not looking good for Gwen. Plus they already casted a mary jane.

TASM was a flop IMO. Not even a worthwhile investment and was just basically all for the money. It totally tried to cash in on TDK's tone which doesn't work for Spider-Man which is why I always prefer the Raimi trilogy over the Webb movies.

TASM was a flop IMO. Not even a worthwhile investment and was just basically all for the money. It totally tried to cash in on TDK's tone which doesn't work for Spider-Man which is why I always prefer the Raimi trilogy over the Webb movies.

I'm going to be honest I really liked TASM. It was much better origin story than the first spiderman IMO. I agree it is a similar tone to Nolan batman series... but pretty much all art is inspired by other art.

Still, when making a comic book movie, it's best to translate the setting, the tone, the pivotal characteristics as best as possible. I had some problem with the execution of the story but my main irk is with the way it was presented. Spider-Man's only real dilemmas are with trying to balance his normal life with that of a superhero. Making Peter some angsty, snarky skateboarding nuisance didn't really sit well with me nor did the excessive use of dark elements surrounding the characters. It should have been subdued enough for the audience to know it was there without going overboard kinda like the SM universe should be. Besides that, his transition from a vengeance seeking marauder to Spider-Man was just to quick and awkward. So was Ben's death. It was just like "Oh, here it is. It happened. Now we can move on."

Still, when making a comic book movie, it's best to translate the setting, the tone, the pivotal characteristics as best as possible. I had some problem with the execution of the story but my main irk is with the way it was presented. Spider-Man's only real dilemmas are with trying to balance his normal life with that of a superhero. Making Peter some angsty, snarky skateboarding nuisance didn't really sit well with me nor did the excessive use of dark elements surrounding the characters. It should have been subdued enough for the audience to know it was there without going overboard kinda like the SM universe should be. Besides that, his transition from a vengeance seeking marauder to Spider-Man was just to quick and awkward. So was Ben's death. It was just like "Oh, here it is. It happened. Now we can move on."

That's fair. I don't think they steered to far from the comics but you nailed where they did. They made spiderman way cooler than he was in the original origin story. That's why I didn't rate the movie higher than I did. I still found it incredibly enjoyable though. the acting was pretty solid for a super hero movie. I think strict adherence to the comic books though makes a boring movie. not every story can be told threw movies exactly how they were written down, while still being a good movie. also it leaves little to no movies to be made in the future because you have to hold true to the original movies.

That's fair. I don't think they steered to far from the comics but you nailed where they did. They made spiderman way cooler than he was in the original origin story. That's why I didn't rate the movie higher than I did. I still found it incredibly enjoyable though. the acting was pretty solid for a super hero movie. I think strict adherence to the comic books though makes a boring movie. not every story can be told threw movies exactly how they were written down, while still being a good movie. also it leaves little to no movies to be made in the future because you have to hold true to the original movies.

Dennis making sense. Is it opposite day?

I'm tired of hearing comic book morons go on about how they should never change characters. (I'm not looking at you Jelly, just sayin') When people do this, are they thinking about the good of the character or it's longevity? No. Are they considering the writers and/or creators, who have every right to choose to take that path? No. They're thinking of themselves, aren't they? Because comic books and their content become like their mothers tit and they don't want to leave it, don't want to make that break because change is scary. It carries with it uncertainty. They think that the change is killing the character but it's the same fucking story for 50 years that is doing it in. So they changed this characters appearance, style or slightly tweaked their personality? So what? You've had it one way for how long now? It's nothing but a completely selfish attitude.

I'm tired of hearing comic book morons go on about how they should never change characters. (I'm not looking at you Jelly, just sayin') When people do this, are they thinking about the good of the character or it's longevity? No. Are they considering the writers and/or creators, who have every right to choose to take that path? No. They're thinking of themselves, aren't they? Because comic books and their content become like their mothers tit and they don't want to leave it, don't want to make that break because change is scary. It carries with it uncertainty. They think that the change is killing the character but it's the same fucking story for 50 years that is doing it in. So they changed this characters appearance, style or slightly tweaked their personality? So what? You've had it one way for how long now? It's nothing but a completely selfish attitude.

I recognize that art relies on expansion and all but in this case, I felt like a lot of things didn't sit well for me in this particular movie. By the way, I'm simply responding to you because I found your opinion on the matter something worth engaging not because I felt you were insinuating negative characteristics onto me and I'm retaliating. Anyways, I don't have problems with comic book movies deviating from original source material. I just don't feel like the core values and setting of the movie should be completely modified. In that sense, it doesn't even appear to reflect the material that they're basing the movie off of in the first place. For TASM, the tone felt topsy-turvy to the standard Spider-Man coming of age story and it should be more apparent that it come across as something less gritty and serious when its his coming of age story. There were some cons to the movie, such as the girl not acting solely as a reward for the hero like Raimi did with MJ for most of the trilogy, and I appreciated what they did with May and Ben.

I recognize that art relies on expansion and all but in this case, I felt like a lot of things didn't sit well for me in this particular movie. By the way, I'm simply responding to you because I found your opinion on the matter something worth engaging not because I felt you were insinuating negative characteristics onto me and I'm retaliating. Anyways, I don't have problems with comic book movies deviating from original source material. I just don't feel like the core values and setting of the movie should be completely modified. In that sense, it doesn't even appear to reflect the material that they're basing the movie off of in the first place. For TASM, the tone felt topsy-turvy to the standard Spider-Man coming of age story and it should be more apparent that it come across as something less gritty and serious when its his coming of age story. There were some cons to the movie, such as the girl not acting solely as a reward for the hero like Raimi did with MJ for most of the trilogy, and I appreciated what they did with May and Ben.

I don't get this. Like, where is it written that Spiderman's coming of age story needs to be light? If anything, I think the darker approach actually makes more sense given the emotions one usually experiences in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. I'd even go so far as to say that was one of the movie's smarter choices; the more things are rooted in reality, the more weight the stakes have.

I don't get this. Like, where is it written that Spiderman's coming of age story needs to be light? If anything, I think the darker approach actually makes more sense given the emotions one usually experiences in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. I'd even go so far as to say that was one of the movie's smarter choices; the more things are rooted in reality, the more weight the stakes have.

I see where you're coming from but from I've seen of his origin story, before he dons the suit and the responsibility of the superhero life, he was just living the life of a normal teenager. But the tone of the move should have started to make a transition to the grit after his uncle's death and not make it a common element before the incentive occurs. I get with the subplot of finding out the truth of his parent's and all, not everything's going to be roses and sunshine but I still would have appreciated seeing that transition.